Make resource gathering more interesting

[Palaxin]

I have read various opinions on this topic like

1. Metal and stone usually are placed directly next to the CC. It should be more risky to mine them and therefore they should be placed farther away. I agree, my suggestion actually is to encourage more risky gathering, but still provide the opportunity to gather savely in the base which will be punished by other means.

2. Balancing of food resources like fishing for villagers (is not really possible at the moment due to some citizen gather range / size of fish resource incompatibiltiy I think), fish and berry regeneration (don't actually know why it wasn't implemented - I guess some disagreement on design?) or making hunting more viable and nerf/change fields (also discussed, but again disagreement on design I think).

I agree especially with the fields: they shouldn't give an infinite supply (and a reseeding queue really doesn't require that much work like in AoE2 if we allow batch "training" like for units - alternatively we could give the option to reseed automatically as long as there are enough resources). And till this day I really haven't understood why on earth something should grow on a field if you throw some wood on it. As seeds are no resource, I would say fields wouldn't require any costs except for a relatively long build time (perhaps 1.5-2.0 times longer than now) and some shorter reseeding time. This would also encourage hunting in the early game as building a field would be really demanding.

I would also like to make field efficiency depend on the ground texture (buff on green and fertile ground and debuff/prohibition on desert, stony, snowy/icy ground). This would make decisions about building placement more interesting. I think Stronghold Crusader did this very well and this was also a reason why this game has been the most popular of the entire Stronghold series. Ok this is a interesting topic, but I won't focus on this further at least for now.

3. I think I once read a ticket about the option to make the amount of resources adjustable in the game setup. E.g. on "low" a tree provides 100 wood, on "medium" 200 wood and on "high" 400 wood. Sadly I couldn't find it again (still need to look at older tickets). If I remember right already some work has been done for it which should be finished and included in the main game because it's a great idea IMO (at least for non-professional / non-ranked games).

A bit off-topic, but still affecting resources gathering:

4. Actually same thing as with the fields: why do I need wood to construct some stone buildings???

IMO building costs should be (more) civ-specific, e.g. greeks, persians, seleucids, carthaginians, seleucids, iberians and romans would have a high demand of stone whereas the celtic tribes and perhaps mauryans would use more wood for most of their buildings. The exact costs would actually depend on the current model used for the building. Of course this would need a lot of balancing, but I'm sure this can be done and adds to the uniqueness of the factions and thus leads to a better gameplay experience. Probably stone slabs would need to provide a bit more resources to fit this increased demand.

Even more off-topic, but interesting:

5. Make trader garrisoning more viable, see http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/3428.

Actually trading is an extra topic, but I just want to raise some attention for this problem which is quite obvious, but still nobody seems to care about it.

6. "Mod for modders" to add/remove resources easily to/from the game.

https://github.com/0ADMods/resource_agnostic

I think it may be considered to include this mod into the main game (if it's finished?). Not because we need it but just for better modding support.

7. Starting resources vs. max population display in the game setup: either we should use numbers for both (e.g. resources: "300", population: "200") or descriptions for both (e.g. resources: "medium", population: "high"). Just for consistency.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thinking about point 1, some additional ideas came to my mind. Apart from treasures, we actually have a relatively huge variety of food sources (fish, fields, hunting, berries) and trees (different kinds of trees and also size, e.g. baobab gives more and some "wood bushes" give less). In contrast, you can just mine one kind of generic metal and one kind of generic stone.

At least for stone there are also ruins and pyramids and I think it's OK if the stone mines just fit to the current environment as they do now (they somehow represent different kinds of stone). Still it would be nice to give them some specific names like "sandstone" for desert, "marble" on mediterranean maps, and so forth. That's not a big deal actually.

Edit: IT SEEMS I CONFUSED SOME PEOPLE WHO THINK I WANT TO INTRODUCE NEW RESOURCES. THIS IS NOT THE CASE. I JUST WANT DIFFERENT SOURCES FOR THE SAME METAL WE USE NOW. Have a look at my mod.

Now, the intersting part is about metals. Metals have very different properties (much more variety as stone - if you speak about chemical composition it may be the other way round, but I mean the macro scale). They can be very rare, heavy and noble like gold or quite light, abundant and reactive like aluminium (though it wasn't possible to extract pure aluminium at those days). They can be even poisonous like mercury to a higher or led to a lesser extent. So all in all I think we should somehow represent that variety in-game even if we stick to generic metal as a resource (like we have differerent food sources, but one food re-source). My suggestion is to differentiate between gold, copper and iron sources/ores, at least by giving the existing ores appropriate textures. This would actually be the chance to introduce some advantages and disadvantages of the ores and thus add some strategic depth. My ticket http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/3635 gives a bit more detailed description of what I think. In a nutshell: you should have to decide if you want to slowly and safely mine iron, which is quite abundant also next to the CC, but quite inefficient OR if you want to expand your territory towards risky places with gold deposits which can give you a strong advantage in metal gathering if you are able to defend your gatherers against attacks and distractions. For existing maps we could either exchange existing metal ores with copper (which should fill the gap in between gold and iron) or leave the generic metal ore as it is and use the new ores only in new scenarios/maps.

Extra: there are templates for small metal ores, but I can't remember to have them found once on a map. At least in Atlas you can create them - the textures are not always fitting to the big ores. Is that the reason?

So what to do? As historic_bruno said it's best to do a small mineral mod for this. More or less I have only modified templates so far and do not have that deep programming skills. However, I would give it a try. If the whole thing works I would probably need some guy for making textures (new meshes would be even better) because I'm not experienced with this topic either.

Thanks for reading, I would be glad to hear some opinions about my points (numbers are roughly priority)

It would be also be helpful to collect more links to the tickets refering to one or more of these topics.

Edited November 24, 2015 by Palaxin

[wraitii]

3. Actually same thing as with the fields: why do I need wood to construct some stone buildings???

IMO building costs should be (more) civ-specific, e.g. greeks, persians, seleucids, carthaginians, seleucids, iberians and romans would have a high demand of stone whereas the celtic tribes and perhaps mauryans would use more wood for most of their buildings.

That should already be the case.

4. Make trader garrisoning more viable, see http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/3428.

Actually trading is an extra topic, but I just want to raise some attention for this problem which is quite obvious, but still nobody seems to care about it.

See my latest post

[Lion.Kanzen]

With farms not, we make the desition to don't replant (2012), but we discuss about leave a farm alone, if a farm is not working, start to loss hp and may be if lost hp the gather rate are lower or less.

[Palaxin]

Hello wraitii and Lion.Kanzen, thanks for replying

That should already be the case.

Yes you are right.

But there are still many cases where the building costs don't really make sense though. For example the basic greek buildings like dropsites do only cost wood though they are mainly made of stone.

On the other hand, the Mauryans also use wood for their elephant stables, temple and fortress (less than stone) but this is not represented in the costs.

I know this is a game and there will always be deviations from reality. I think there is still some room for improvement and I could actually make a mod or patch for this.

See my latest post

I like your idea to split from the trading principle of AoE and AoM since it always seemed somehow artificial to me. I will definitely think about this further and support your proposals.

With farms not, we make the desition to don't replant (2012), but we discuss about leave a farm alone, if a farm is not working, start to loss hp and may be if lost hp the gather rate are lower or less.

Ok, yes I would advocate losing HP for fields, but in this case also dead animals would have to lose HP. However, an abandoned farm should be build up first before gathering again, I think.

Reseeding actually makes more sense when seasons are implemented (which seems not to be the case in the near future). Has this been a final decision to not reseed farms no matter if the game will implement some new features? I agree that at the current state reseeding isn't necessarily needed.

Edited November 23, 2015 by Palaxin

[wackyserious]

6. "Mod for modders" to add/remove resources easily to/from the game.

https://github.com/0ADMods/resource_agnostic

I think it may be considered to include this mod into the main game (if it's finished?). Not because we need it but just for better modding support.

This one, please.

I hope this one gets integrated in the game someday..

Maybe an extra UI panel that can be shown or hidden with a button?

Edited November 23, 2015 by wackyserious

[Palaxin]

Maybe an extra UI panel that can be shown or hidden with a button?

As far as I have understood this mod dynamically handles the UI so you don't have to bother with UI programming...

I still have to try it

Edited November 23, 2015 by Palaxin

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

I don't think the game need more resource, just more interesting way to get each one.

I think getting metal should be different from getting stone. I would like the game to have metal mines and stone quarries. Real ones.

• Stone quarries look like open pit quarry. They are large and skinned for biome (sandstone pit mine for Egypt, etc.). They are more rare than stone mine are now, but are something like 10,000 stone or 20,000 stone, so can eventually be exhaust but last a long time. So, probably 4 per player on the map (fewer per player as number of player goes up, to encourage trade).
• Metal mine look like opening to a shaft mine with a slot next to it. Build storehouse on the slot to gain control. You garrison units inside the shaft mine to gather the metal. They come out and deposit the metal at the Storehouse (like Vespeen Gas mine in Starcraft). They are rare, remote, and infinite. Maybe 2 per player on the map (fewer per player as number of player goes up, to encourage trade). If Storehouse detsoy by enemy, the "entrance" to the mine "collapses" and any of your unit inside die. Enemy can build Storhouse on the slot and the mine entrance reopen.
• There are 1 deposit of the current stone and metal objects in the player starting territory to start of the match. After those exhauste the player need to find the open pit quarruies and shaft mines.

If we were to add resource, I would want it to be GLORY*. It is gain by fighting (some unit gain more glory than other; Basic->Advance->Elite->Champion->Hero) and by building special buildings and Wonders. Temple trickle it. Heroes can cost Glory. Extra-strong Phase IV techs can cost GLORY. Upgrading rank of units can cost GLORY. Like, you can select a battalion and rank them all up at same time if you have enough Glory.

*It can be call anything, like Influence or whatever, but Glory sound good to me.

Edited November 24, 2015 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Palaxin]

On 11/24/2015 at 7:31 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I don't think the game need more resource, just more interesting way to get each one.

This is exactly what I want, too. See also this comment.

On 11/24/2015 at 7:31 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Stone quarries look like open pit quarry. They are large and skinned for biome (sandstone pit mine for Egypt, etc.). They are more rare than stone mine are now, but are something like 10,000 stone or 20,000 stone, so can eventually be exhaust but last a long time. So, probably 4 per player on the map (fewer per player as number of player goes up, to encourage trade).

Yes, I agree, but we would need some people willing to do new models and textures... I was always asking myself why you can't gather stone from the ground/pit in many RTS

On 11/24/2015 at 7:31 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Metal mine look like opening to a shaft mine with a slot next to it. Build storehouse on the slot to gain control. You garrison units inside the shaft mine to gather the metal. They come out and deposit the metal at the Storehouse (like Vespeen Gas mine in Starcraft). They are rare, remote, and infinite. Maybe 2 per player on the map (fewer per player as number of player goes up, to encourage trade). If Storehouse detsoy by enemy, the "entrance" to the mine "collapses" and any of your unit inside die. Enemy can build Storhouse on the slot and the mine entrance reopen.

Shaft mining sounds also reasonable to me. I think you should be able to directly destroy the mine (i.e. the entry of the mine) no matter what the storehouse does. I'm really no friend of infinite resources, but mines could have large deposits and as time progresses gathering would get slower on the one hand (digging deeper), but you could garrison more units in them (more tunnels, mine system is growing). My mod actually introduces rare, but very attractive metal sources with a really high gathering rate to encourage riskier playstyle (but no shaft mining yet)

On 11/24/2015 at 7:31 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

There are 1 deposit of the current stone and metal objects in the player starting territory to start of the match. After those exhauste the player need to find the open pit quarruies and shaft mines.

Will not be changed in my mod. However, gathering at the initial sources will be much slower than now, whereas gathering at remote and rare sources will be faster than now.

On 11/24/2015 at 7:31 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

If we were to add resource, I would want it to be GLORY*. It is gain by fighting (some unit gain more glory than other; Basic->Advance->Elite->Champion->Hero) and by building special buildings and Wonders. Temple trickle it. Heroes can cost Glory. Extra-strong Phase IV techs can cost GLORY. Upgrading rank of units can cost GLORY. Like, you can select a battalion and rank them all up at same time if you have enough Glory.

Not a fan of highly artificial "resources". I'd rather split "normal metal" from "noble metal" or "iron" from "gold" to have a highly rare and precious resource. I don't think we need that, though.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Palaxin

[wackyserious]

Not a fan of highly artificial "resources". I'd rather split "normal metal" from "noble metal" or "iron" from "gold" to have a highly rare and precious resource. I don't think we need that, though.

or.. a resource we can call, coin/coinage (copper, silver, and gold coins merged together as a single resource) should taxation be introduced in the game.

Edited November 24, 2015 by wackyserious

[Palaxin]

or.. a resource we can call, coin/coinage (copper, silver, and gold coins merged together as a single resource) should taxation be introduced in the game.

Not sure if that would fit that much into the current resource system. In my opinion we have only basic resources so far whereas coins are goods / crafted things which actually fit into more detailed resource systems (see my models below )

I think the current resources are quite good because they are

- consistent: all physical resources

- general: no special resources which might play a role in the one game and not in other games - special resources are more or less included in the general ones

My "resource philosophy" is based on the following three models. If I want to add a resource I have to think if it fits well into the existing model. Actually there are many games which do not fit in any of these categories, often when mythical / fantasy or non RTS elements are involved.

SIMPLE MODEL

number of resources: about 2-6

resource types: very general resources, often grouping more special resources, no recource processing like metal melting from ores

examples of frequently used resources: food, wood, stone, iron, gold

resource storage: stored in a cloud, usually no limit

examples of games: 0 A.D., AoE and most other RTS

If I had to add resources to 0 A.D. these would be in the following order:

1. water

pro: the very basis for life - no much explanation needed

contra: could be included in food - doesn't really make sense to me though

--> used for training organic units and building/reseeding fields

--> can be obtained at wells, and some civs may develop cisterns and aqueducts in late phases; efficiency would depend on ground (slow gather rate at dry ground texture, high gather rate near waters, mountains or on grassland)

--> especially dry and desert maps would become harder and more strategic, oases would provide additional benefits

2. clay/silt/mud

pro: a lot of cultures built their houses entirely or mainly of mudbricks

contra: could be included in stone, some cultures didn't use it much

--> African and middle eastern civs may extensively use this resource for building

--> can be obtained easily in pits

--> could be also used for pottery/trade

3. split up metal in two categories

pro: noble metals were used as coins and for decorative purposes whereas other metals mainly for tools, weapons, construction and practical purposes

--> metal includes iron, copper, led, copper, tin, zinc, ...

--> noble metals include gold and silver

4. textile (could be named similarly)

pro: very wide usage in all cultures like cloths, carpets, sails, ropes/nets, ...

contra: is not an inorganic resource like the other ones which can be collected from earth (breaks consistency)

ADVANCED MODEL

something between simple and and advanced model; therefore many inconsistencies and rare usage (either I don't know good games or this model is partly my own creation )

number of resources: about 6-15

resource types: usually no goods / crafted things, but more detailed basic resources than in the simple model

examples of additional resources: coal, different ore types (iron, copper, ...), oil, salt, ...

resource storage: usually in a cloud with additional features like resource consumption over time by units

examples of games: Cossacks

DETAILED MODEL

number of resources: about 15-50

resource type: all types of resources, detailed differentiation, also crafted "resources" / goods

resource storage: physically existing place with limited capacity like a storehouse, resources are transported between processing and even to construction sites (not necessarily)

example of games: Stronghold series, The settlers (more known in Germany), Anno probably (haven't played it) - ususally these games are less focused on warfare and more on economy (Stronghold being some very nice exception)

Edited November 24, 2015 by Palaxin

[Lion.Kanzen]

City builder stockpile, fear about that, but about these resources can work as bonus don't?

Edited November 24, 2015 by Lion.Kanzen

[GunChleoc]

I don't think that the detailed model would work here, because that would take too much managing time away from the military part of this game. I see 0AD's focus somewhere in the middle: It is part city builder, but the ultimate goal is to invade and defeat the enemy.

/begin shameless plug

BTW here's another example of a city builder, similar to The Settlers: https://wl.widelands.org/

/end shameless plug

[Lion.Kanzen]

Gentlemen, we need focus in war mean. if we want have more complex system but simple, use RoN ideas.

All these resources are bonus or equivalent for stockpile auto gathering( with low rates)

[Palaxin]

City builder stockpile, fear about that

I don't think that the detailed model would work here

Nooo, I don't want a detailed model in 0 A.D.! Just did a comparison and tried to explain why I personally don't like a resource like coins in the game. But other people can have other opinions and that's Ok

I think we actually have enough (and the right) resources, but gathering them could be made more exciting.

It would be interesting still to see some mod one day which introduces a resource limit determined by the sum of your buildings on the map. E.g. each CC +5000 resources and each storehouse +2000 resources. This limit would be the sum of all your resources (not a limit for each resource type). So this would require a little bit more economic management for your city.

/begin shameless plug

BTW here's another example of a city builder, similar to The Settlers: https://wl.widelands.org/

/end shameless plug

Haha, looks similar to Settlers I/II. Settlers III actually nearly was the first game I've played. And btw even if you had about 30 resources/goods in this game there was a solid roster of 3 military unit types to crush your enemy which also was the ultimate goal in most games. It just didn't look very tactical when a swarm of 500-1000 soldiers flooded the enemey territory like a liquid and filled your entire screen (my record were >20000 civil units)

Gentlemen, we need focus in war mean. if we want have more complex system but simple, use RoN ideas.

All these resources are bonus or equivalent for stockpile auto gathering( with low rates)

I actually haven't played RoN, but with Stronghold Crusader I've experience that even complex economy and complex military can work together.

In the end, we all know that 0 A.D. won't introduce a new resource system because it works fine as it is. I even heavily doubt that a single resource will be added and I actually do not have a problem with that. As I said, make gathering the existing resources more fun and its better than every new resource you would add.

Edited November 24, 2015 by Palaxin

[Lion.Kanzen]

@Palaxin haven't play Stronghold yet, open a off topic talking about the RTS and strategy games experience by our member, and listed mostly. And I promise play.

The rare resources, aren't resources, you don't gathering or buy anything with them. Only there are 3 o 2 resources in that game. The rare resources are bonus, if you " capture them" , example marble gets bonus to richness ( metal in 0AD)

Edited November 25, 2015 by Lion.Kanzen

[AIEND]

I'm not in favor of separating currency and metal. Maybe Europeans and Americans think that iron and copper are very different from gold and silver, but Chinese people don't think so. Copper is a precious metal for China. We use copper to make coins. When copper is not enough, we also use iron to cast money.
I'm more concerned with joining some factories, cottage industries or plantations to get the metal, like vineyards, pottery factories, Small family textile industry.
Plantations can be like farmland for farmers to plant. And the pottery factory can produce a metal trickle, but it takes up the population. Small family textile industry can get metal trickle down to every dwelling, but will reduce the population support that every dwelling provides.

[Lion.Kanzen]

14 minutes ago, AIEND said:

pottery factory

I like that idea or a factory of olives.

Olive trees and oil were an industry.

now with the Chinese faction we would have the silk industry.

Wine is also a luxury and an industry.

 

[AIEND]

6 分钟前，Lion.Kanzen 说：

我喜欢这个想法或橄榄工厂。

橄榄树和油是一个产业。

现在有了中国派，我们就有了丝绸工业。

葡萄酒也是一种奢侈品，也是一种产业。

This is actually the inspiration provided by AoE 3, but the cash crops there are tobacco, tea, cotton and coffee (in fact, there can also be poppy).
In addition to silk, Han Dynasty China also produced lacquerware (porcelain was not very advanced at that time).

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 minute ago, AIEND said:

This is actually the inspiration provided by AoE 3, but the cash crops there are tobacco, tea, cotton and coffee (in fact, there can also be poppy).
In addition to silk, Han Dynasty China also produced lacquerware (porcelain was not very advanced at that time).

pottery must be generic factory (all civs).

[AIEND]

6 分钟前，Lion.Kanzen 说：

陶器必须是通用工厂（所有文明）。

Some civilizations can be leather or lacquer factories, depending on the faction, special names and models.
But they are all generic buildings, the generic name is the factory, which does not require workers but occupies the population.

[AIEND]

Every civilization should have a kind of plantation, a factory and a small family textile industry.
The Greeks, for example, were olive groves, pottery factories, and linen.
The Chinese are tea gardens, lacquerware factories and silk and satin.
Indians are spice gardens, pottery factories and cotton cloth.
The Persians are vineyards, blanket factories and woolen fabrics.

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 minute ago, AIEND said:

The Greeks, for example, were olive groves, pottery factories, and linen.

Mediterranean (Except Spain) Spain had something else.

[AIEND]

2 分钟前，Lion.Kanzen 说：

地中海（西班牙除外） 西班牙有别的东西。

What's in Spain?  

Also I was thinking maybe I should give the vineyard to the Celts.
And the Persians should have Date palm.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Just now, AIEND said:

Also I was thinking maybe I should give the vineyard to the Celts.
And the Persians should have Date palm

barley and metalworking but not for weapons.

[Lion.Kanzen]

From Spanish wiki Orfebrería.

Originally, the techniques used in gold working were very simple. Cold hammering provided sheets and wires that could take different shapes. Later, but still at an early stage, heating and melting were used. Technical advances led to a diversification of shapes. In the Iberian Peninsula, from the Final Bronze Age onwards, composite pieces and the first alloys are documented. In Spain, part of the continuity of goldsmith work is associated with celebrations such as Holy Week.[3] In the Iberian Peninsula, from the Final Bronze Age onwards, composite pieces and the first alloys are documented.